Biomedical technocracy, the networked public sphere and the biopolitics of COVID-19: notes on the Agamben affair

IF 0.7 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
T. Christiaens
{"title":"Biomedical technocracy, the networked public sphere and the biopolitics of COVID-19: notes on the Agamben affair","authors":"T. Christiaens","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2022.2099919","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Giorgio Agamben’s public interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic against emergency measures like lockdowns, obligatory vaccinations and the prescribed use of masks have been highly controversial. I argue that Agamben’s essays must be read as a modern prophecy of doom warning for the dangers of biomedical technocracy. Agamben marshals the sound of Old Testament prophets to shock his readers into critically rethinking their complacency with governmental norms. This warning is appropriate yet ill-phrased: Agamben presumes the dominant obstacle to genuine debate in the public sphere is a standardisation of discourse under the power of monopoly capital, whereas the opposite problem of too many divergent voices is more salient for today’s digitally networked public sphere. Furthermore, Agamben depicts a too strong contrast between scientifically informed technocratic government and democratic freedom, which leaves him blind for the democratic potential of the sciences themselves. I employ Ulrich Beck’s theory of the risk society and social movements to introduce more nuance into Agamben’s apocalyptic prophecy.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"94 1","pages":"404 - 421"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture Theory and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2022.2099919","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT Giorgio Agamben’s public interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic against emergency measures like lockdowns, obligatory vaccinations and the prescribed use of masks have been highly controversial. I argue that Agamben’s essays must be read as a modern prophecy of doom warning for the dangers of biomedical technocracy. Agamben marshals the sound of Old Testament prophets to shock his readers into critically rethinking their complacency with governmental norms. This warning is appropriate yet ill-phrased: Agamben presumes the dominant obstacle to genuine debate in the public sphere is a standardisation of discourse under the power of monopoly capital, whereas the opposite problem of too many divergent voices is more salient for today’s digitally networked public sphere. Furthermore, Agamben depicts a too strong contrast between scientifically informed technocratic government and democratic freedom, which leaves him blind for the democratic potential of the sciences themselves. I employ Ulrich Beck’s theory of the risk society and social movements to introduce more nuance into Agamben’s apocalyptic prophecy.
生物医学技术官僚、网络公共领域和COVID-19的生物政治:关于阿甘本事件的说明
乔治·阿甘本(Giorgio Agamben)在COVID-19大流行期间对封锁、强制性疫苗接种和规定使用口罩等紧急措施的公开干预引起了极大争议。我认为,阿甘本的文章必须被解读为对生物医学技术官僚主义危险的现代末日预言。阿甘本用《旧约》先知的声音来震撼他的读者,让他们批判性地重新思考他们对政府规范的自满。这一警告是恰当的,但措辞不当:阿甘本认为,公共领域真正辩论的主要障碍是垄断资本权力下的话语标准化,而相反的问题是,太多不同的声音在今天的数字网络化公共领域更为突出。此外,阿甘本在科学知识的技术官僚政府和民主自由之间描绘了过于强烈的对比,这使他对科学本身的民主潜力视而不见。我运用乌尔里希·贝克(Ulrich Beck)关于风险社会和社会运动的理论,为阿甘本的末世预言引入更多细微差别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Culture Theory and Critique
Culture Theory and Critique HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
6
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信